Explain the Justification of War

[Andrew Lynch]

Can some on please explain to me the justification of this war

As far as i can see its all about OIL

As well as letting Britian And America Colonise another country

We are only being told what america and britian want us to here and that changes a lot i.e have they taken BASRA

[Force Flow]

In a nutshell? Bush wants to get rid of Saddam.

[Andrew Lynch]

Why? What does Bush want? OIL?

[morriswindgate]

Terrorists can only exist if they have benefactors that supply them with money, safe haven, training, and weapons. Iraq has been identified as one of these countries, by the way it is also rumored that they have supplies help to the IRA.
The middle east as a whole is governed by small family groups of despots who live high while their population starves and lives in poverty. And to keep their power they subject their own people to terror or in the case of Pakistan and Saudi, they encourage an anti-western agenda through proxies.
Think about this;
Among all Arab countries there is not a single representative country.
Among all Arab countries there is not a single manufactured product that is exported.
Among all Arab countries there is not a single recognized world class university. And the arabs are the people who invented most modern math, science, and humanities.

It is not about oil or colonies, if it were then why did the USA not take over the Kuwaiti oilfields or make them pay for the 1st Gulf war by giving their oil to us for free or less than market price.
The problem that you have, where you live, is that the French have seen this as a chance to increase their power in the EU over the Brits, which they have historically dispised.

[Andrew Lynch]

1. Kuwaiti had to pay for the last war
2. The Arab countries are oppressed not by themselves but by the west with there santions etc
3. I live in the oppressed NOrthern Ireland
4. The IRA is not responsible for everything!!

[Strider]

1. Kuwaitt probably did help pay for the last war, but the majority fell on the coalition of countries that fought. Besides it's not like Kuwaitt couldn't afford to help pay, for they are a rich nation full of oil.
2. Not to sound prejudice, but they (Arabs, mainly Saddam and his regime) played games with the U.N. inpections by playing hide and seek (12 years they did this) - where all they had to do was obey the U.N. resolutions. They weren't oppressed, but plain stupid.
3. ?
4. Iraq is not reponsible for everthing, but for the majority of the mess - They are. See No. 2

[piasabird]

How can the country (IRAQ) which has the 2nd largest supply of Oil in the world claim to be oppressed? Sadam is a mad man! There is enough money coming in from the sale of oil to Iraq to allow everyone to live reasonably well. However, Sadam has oppressed his own people. People in the middle east are oppressed because none of these countries even resemble a democracy. They all are led by dictators that run their countries like Nazis. They oppress themselves.

[newme]

im not an expert but seems to me they produce enough oil to be a wealthy nation,where has all the money gone?the other thing ive noticed is ,as soon as an iraq citizen doesnt have a gun held to there head and has freedom to speak,they say there glad to see the coalition there,even at the exspense of loss of life.one fella said he lost some his family ,but said the way they were treated by there own government they had no life anyways.

[sdkfz]

Please list the leaders who

1) Have used nerve gas against anyone
2) Who use rape as a governmental policy instrument
3) Who invade neighbors without asking for permission from the UN and then in their obvious interest to 'help' their neighbors (this is why they invaded right? reverse oppresion etc ) immediatly start to systematically strip the liberated people of anything of value.

Since, obviously, I know nothing about the situation, being a brain washed citizen of the US and a subject to the crown of England -Let me ask you one question.

When are you moving yourself and your family to this paradise called Iraq?

[StuartW]

Originally posted by Andrew Lynch 3. I live in the oppressed NOrthern Ireland

Countless polls have shown that the MAJORITY of people in Northern Ireland wish to remain part of the UK mainland. It is only Irish terrorists who consider they are oppressed, and try to overcome the majority consensus , and enforce what they want ,with a rule of terror and bombing.
A bit like the Iraq Republican Guard.

[Andrew Lynch]

Originally posted by StuartW Countless polls have shown that the MAJORITY of people in Northern Ireland wish to remain part of the UK mainland. It is only Irish terrorists who consider they are oppressed, and try to overcome the majority consensus , and enforce what they want ,with a rule of terror and bombing. A bit like the Iraq Republican Guard.

If u lived in the unlawfully occupied six counties u might realize a thing or two like the police brutality and the corruption in the PSNI, as well as the best housing and jobs being offered to the members of the protestant community

[shazam]

When you builed temples unto oneself 1 mile long and 200 ft. It must cost at least a buck and a half. And theres about 5 of them .Thats about seven and a half bucks. Plenty left over for the people.

[StuartW]

Originally posted by Andrew Lynch If u lived in the unlawfully occupied six counties u might realize a thing or two like the police brutality and the corruption in the PSNI, as well as the best housing and jobs being offered to the members of the protestant community

It makes me sad that at the start of the 21st Century, there are still people who are trying to fight the battles of almost a hundred years ago instead of trying to peacefully co-exist and enjoy life.
Andrew, perhaps you could prove your extraordinary statement quoted above.By proof I mean unbiased eyewitness reports, and not the usual Socialist and terrorist propaganda thats only purpose is to destroy a democratically run society. The six Counties comprise of roughly 50-50 Protestant/Catholic; and the many Irish people I know there are wonderful, witty people more interested in making the most of life instead of continually fighting a lost battle. Obviously your anger at this historic event is tearing you apart.Why not lighten up and enjoy life, it is very short.

[TimPoet]

Originally posted by Andrew Lynch 1. Kuwaiti had to pay for the last war 2. The Arab countries are oppressed not by themselves but by the west with there santions etc 3. I live in the oppressed NOrthern Ireland 4. The IRA is not responsible for everything!!

1. No, Saudi Arabia did.
2. No, by their dictatorships, they need good ole Western freedoms.
3. I live in unoppressive Southern Nevada.
4. I believe that.

Originally posted by morriswindgate Terrorists can only exist if they have benefactors that supply them with money, safe haven, training, and weapons. Iraq has been identified as one of these countries, by the way it is also rumored that they have supplies help to the IRA. The middle east as a whole is governed by small family groups of despots who live high while their population starves and lives in poverty. And to keep their power they subject their own people to terror or in the case of Pakistan and Saudi, they encourage an anti-western agenda through proxies. Think about this; Among all Arab countries there is not a single representative country. Among all Arab countries there is not a single manufactured product that is exported. Among all Arab countries there is not a single recognized world class university. And the arabs are the people who invented most modern math, science, and humanities. It is not about oil or colonies, if it were then why did the USA not take over the Kuwaiti oilfields or make them pay for the 1st Gulf war by giving their oil to us for free or less than market price.

Excellent points all, Morris!

[Zred1]

Thank God we live in a country where the majority rules. I love the Freedom to speak my mind and in a perfect world there would be no war. All people would be able to rationalize and come to agreement and treat others with respect. Unfortunately the world is not perfect and Evil people need to be dealt with. More Iraqi people have died by Saddam's hand while we tried to reason with him than in either war to date. Sometimes war is a NECESSARY EVIL. GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS!!!!

[icallmedan]

For the last time OIL is not the reason.....you know what i am going to make my own thread...

[Andrew Lynch]

In yesterdays (31th March's) Daily Mirror it was reporting on what is going to happen after the war i.e. the building of Airports Hospitals etc I agree that this should be done for two reasons

1. They need these modern Facilities
2. "The Collition" caused this damage so they should fix it

BUT the intresting part was that the contracts for this work was being awarded to American Companies without going through the UN

IS this JUSTIFIED I dont think so !!

[mikeL]

1. The UN had years to do something about the problem, but they didn't.

2. I think contracts should be awarded first to countries within the coalition, then all the countries that didn't support the coalition, would be put on the bottom of the list and get the contracts leftover, (If there would be any)

[Nuclear Krusader]

Oil is not the reason?

Then perhaps you should read what I got today in the mail.

(My own thoughs are in italics)

____________________________________________________

There are many reasons for the obsession of George Bush towards Bagdad. In other articles that I have written for Yellow Times.org, I made reference to the not so obvious reason against Iraq, but to the war of Bush against Europe. In fact I believe that it is the main reason of his fixation against Iraq. Whenever a nation decides to go to war they formulate plans on whom will win and who will lose; nobody goes to a war hoping to lose, but not always the obvious target of the aggression is the true reason for the war. Sometimes it is not what you want to win of a war but, rather, what the other will lose; and that other does not have to be your declared enemy.

In this case, Bush's victim is the European economy, which is robust and probably will grow even more strong in the near future. The entrance of Great Britain in the European Union is unavoidable; Scandinavia will be united early more than late. Already, even in those countries, there will be 10 new nations members in May of 2004, which will inflate the GIP of the European Union to near $9,6 trillions, with 450 million people, in contrast to $10,5 trillions and 280 million people in the U.S.A. This represents a formidable block of competition for the U.S.A. but the situation is much more complex of what these numbers reveal and much of it depends on the future of Iraq.

I have written before, like many others, that this war is about oil. Surely that there are other reasons, but oil is the force that most impels it. Not in the way that could be expected, nevertheless. It is not as much that one believes that there are enormous oil reserves without proccesing in Iraq and that they have not been due to Iraq's old technology; it is not as much the desire of North America to put its dirty hands on that oil. It is because of the dirty hands that the North Americans want to keep away from it.

What triggered all this precipitated was not the 9/11, neither a sudden realization that Sadam is repugnant type, nor the change of leadership in the USA. What precipitated this was what Iraq did the 6 of November of 2000: changing to euro as the currency with which to make its oil transactions. At the moment of the change it could seem idiotic that Iraq was resigning to such amount of oil gains to make a political declaration. But this political declaration became and the constant depreciation of the dollar against euro since then means that Iraq has obtained good gains when changing its reserves and their currency to make transactions. Euro has won near 17% on the dollar from
that moment, which also is due to apply to the $10 trillions that are at heart of reserve of the United Nations "oil for food" for Iraq. The question that arises, and the one that George Bush asked himself, is this one: What would happen if OPEP, suddenly, changes to euro? In a brief word: chaos.

At the end of World War II an agreement in the conference of Bretton Woods fixed the value of gold to $35 the ounce and this became the International Standard with which the currencies were measured. But in 1971 Richard Nixon removed the dollar from the gold standard and ever since the dollar has been the most important global monetary instrument and only the USA can produce it. The dollar, now a currency without endorsement, is high in spite of the deficit record of current account and estatus of the USA like the main indebted nation. The debt of the USA the 4 of April of 2002, was of $6,021 trillions against the GIP of $9 trillions. The commerce between the nations has become a cycle in which the USA produces dollars and the rest of the world produces what the dollars can buy (a modern form of cholonialism if you ask me). The nations no longer deal to obtain competitive advantages, but rather to manage the dollars that need for the service in dollars of their external debts and to accumulate dollars like reserve, in order to maintain the value of change of their domestic currencies. In an effort to prevent speculative attacks and potential detrimental attacks to their currencies, the central banks of these nations must acquire and maintain reserves of dollars equivalent to their own circulating currency. This situation creates a support incorporated for a strong dollar, that simultaneously forces the central banks of the world to acquire and to maintain but reserves in dollars, thus strengthening the dollar. This phenomenon is known like "the hegemony of the dollar" which is created with the peculiarity of which the merchandise critics, mainly oil, are denominated in dollars. Everybody accepts dollars because the dollars can buy oil. The reality is that the force of the dollar since 1945 resides in being the international currency for the global oil transactions (that is to say, "petro-dollar"). The USA prints hundreds of trillions of these without any endorsement; "petrodollars" then are used by the nations to buy oil and energy of the producers of OPEC (except at the moment Iraq and in certain degree Venezuela which would explain why the USA has been desestabilizing
Venezuela and striving to depose Hugo Chavez). These petrodollars are recycled by OPEC again towards the USA, via letters of the treasure or other assets denominated in dollars, such as actions, real estate, etc. The recycling of petrodollars is the price that the USA has extracted since 1973 from the oil-producing countries by its tolerance to the exporting petroleum cartel.

The reserves of dollars must be invested in North American assets, which produces an excess in accounts of capital for the economy of the USA In spite of the poor operation of the market during the last year, the value of the North American reserves is still a 25 higher percent and the commerce a 56 percent over its value compared with the emergent markets. The excess of the capital accounts finances the commercial deficit. Since the USA prints the petrodollars, they control the oil flow and that's it. As oil is paid in dollars and the dollar is the only currency to negotiate it, we can reach the conclusion that the USA has the oil of the world for free. Then, what would happen if OPEC as a group decided to follow the example of Iraq and began to negotiate petroleum in euros? Economic meltdown.

The oil consuming nations would have to get out the dollars the reserves of their central banks and have them replaced by euros. The value of the dollar would come down and the consequences would be those that could be expected of any currency's collapse and massive inflation (take Argentina, as an example); the foreign invests could leave the North American market hastily and there would be an escape from the banks of the assets in dollars like the one of 1930; the budgetary deficit would be failed to fulfill so on and on. And this only in the USA. Japan would be struck hard because of its total dependency of foreign oil and its incredible sensitivity to the American dollar. If the economy of
Japan falls, many other countries would also fall, specially the United States in a "Domino effect". This it is the potential effect of a "sudden" change to euros.

A more gradual change could be manageable, but this would also change the financial and political balance of the world. Given the size of the European market, his population, his oil needs (Europe imports more oil than the USA), the Euro could quickly become in fact the Standard currency for the world. There are some good reasons for the OPEC as group following Iraq's move and beginning to value oil in euros. There are few doubts as to that they can enjoy the opportunity to make a political declaration after so many years have to stoop before the USA and pay it homage, but there are solid economic reasons also.

The almighty dollar has reigned supreme since 1945 and in the last years it has taken still more terrain with the world's economic domination of the USA. At the end of the 90's more than the four fifth parts of the transactions in foreign currency and half of all the world-wide exports was done in dollars. The objective of the Bush's war against Iraq, of course, is to secure the control of these oil fields and to revert its value to dollars soon to increase exponentially the production to force the prices to lower. Finally, the objective of Bush's war is to threaten taking significant actions against anyone from the oil producers if they change to euro. In the long term, the objective is not really Sadam, is the euro and, of course, Europe. The USA is not going to sit there arms crossed calmly and let those European take the reins of their destiny and of the world's finances. Of course, everything depends on how Bush's crazy plan, does not trigger a Third World war, as it can happen.

[Andrew Lynch]

Am speackless

could you put the web address to this thread of where you reecived your information

Thank You

[Nuclear Krusader]

A friend got it in his mail and forwarded it to his contacts (me being one of them). I dunno who sent it to him.

[WJWheels]

hehehe... I just went to www.yellowtimes.org and got this response:

Welcome to YellowTimes.org. Currently our site is down. Please check back on Wednesday, April 2, 2003. YellowTimes.org

It sure looks to be a reliable source.

[Nuclear Krusader]

LOL.

Perhaps they took down the site so the contents wouldn't be think of an April's fools day joke?

[WJWheels]

I guess a well-written letter of someone's opinion/conjecture (and that's all the unsigned epistle really is) is considered to be more convincing than a simple placard proclaiming: BUSH JUST WANTS TO RULE THE WORLD.

[raftero]

after the efforts of the united states in defeating both hitler and the japinese all the country we ask for was a place to bury our dead. the US will not colonise nor steal the oil,and if the UN had acted as it should(or better yet if saddam had) there would have been no reason for inspectors and no war.there is little doubt if saddam had the bomb he would use it and there would not be much anyone could do then.why were children dying,not because the bad old US was holding back supplies but because the money saddam had(through oil and drugs)was spent on saddam.

[TimPoet]

Originally posted by raftero there is little doubt if saddam had the bomb he would use it and there would not be much anyone could do then.

That is the justification for the war. He would provide them to terrorists. Terrorists want to destroy as much of Israel and America as they can. Saddam sought nuclear weapons.
We'll put his sorry a** down and anybody else we can identify as being a WMD threat to us via terrorists or otherwise. That includes Iran and N. Korea, those sick thugs....

[Byte 2.0]

Right Now I think Saddam is holding back, He knows if he deploys his weapons of Mass D. More countries will back the USA, (even France as said they will) as for Germany, they built his bunkers, they aren't going to do anything. That is the last thing he wants, He is going to sit there and be the victum, he is not going to tip his hand and show what he has been hiding for years. However, He has launched a few Scuds(the ones he don't Have). Now when the USA gets closer, some of his commanders might use those weapons in a last effort to stop the advancement.

As for who gets the contracts to rebuild Iraq, It should be thoses involved.

[mystvearn]

Yes-its oil. bush plans to use the oil to rebuild iraq.

Now lets think for a moment-forget any sides-

Think: first a country eager to go to war without consent-then after destroying the infrastructure-goes in and rebuilds it back-with the loosing's side treasure. IS that fair?

This is one of the reasons that the Iraq people hit those humatarian trucks

[AlwaysUp]

the Yellow Times? Not sure I feel like this publication would be unbiased. .....hmmmm.....No, now that I think about it; I am SURE what I feel about this publication! Andrew Lynch get on over there guy, sounds like your kinda place. BTW, I have never seen more threads closed attributable to a single member, as you! Congrats.

[not important]

There is no justification for any war! War is by politicians for politicians.